Thanks, neofight. Accoring to the following, Teck would never get this thrown out or modified unless they had a Judge in their pocket; /[edit]Canada In the Canadian case of Bercovici v Palmer (1966) 59 DLR (2d) 513 a lawyer's "inexplicable error" extended a conveyance of real property to include a cottage. One of the parties later tried to assert that the inclusion was intended, but the trial judge did not believe this evidence and concluded that he was "satisfied beyond any fair and reasonable doubt that the (cottage) was not intended by either party to be included in their transaction." On appeal, the court added that in cases where rectification is an issue, it is within the purview of the court to consider conduct subsequent to the contract." Rip